[documentation] Contributors to docs need more public recognition

[Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen]

Steve Dondley skrev:
>On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 1:43 AM, Angela Byron <drupal-docs at webchick.net> wrote:
>>Steve Dondley wrote:
>>>What's wrong with being as public as possible with patting people on
>>>the back?
>>Well, the things that I mentioned in my previous mails that were glossed
>>over because of the ownership vs. maintainership clarification:
>>
>>- A movement toward individual ownership of *handbook pages*, rather
>>than community ownership of *the handbook*.
>>- Additional responsibility laid on the original author which currently
>>doesn't exist.
>>- A bulls-eye on the forehead of anyone who contributes documentation,
>>for easy target practice from people seeking support.
>>- Sticky questions about who "really" owns $page, when this often isn't
>>clear or can even possibly be determined.
>>- Additional administrative overhead for docs team members who could
>>instead just be writing and improving the docs.
>
>I've said repeatedly I'm not attached to that proposal. I really don't
>care about it so that effectively kills debate on it, doesn't it? [...]

As I read it, all the above concerns apply just as well to your original 
proposal (and was meant as comments to your original proposal as well, 
if I'm not much mistaken) as they did/do to you "maintainer proposal". 
Stop using your dismissal of the "maintainer proposal" as an excuse to 
easily dismiss these (IMHO) valid points/issues.

>>>Do you think giving people more credit will help Drupal find more
>>>contributors? Yes or no? Because that's what this is really about.
>>The answer is, I don't know. It's certainly not a motivating factor for
>>me, personally, nor apparently for the 700+ existing handbook
>>contributors who are apparently fine and dandy with the existing level
>>of credit they receive.
>
>Well, I can only speculate, but I doubt you would be happy toiling
>away on Drupal in perfect obscurity. How would have Lullabot ever
>found you? As great as you are, I still think an ego lurks within. :)

Even if she wasn't given credit, she was still obviously found. Why was 
she found? Probably because she was active. She isn't given credit in 
the code, she isn't given credit in the documentation (well, what I've 
found). She is given credit in the edit history (CVS messages, 
revisions) and as a participant of discussions (mailing list, IRC, issue 
queue) though, just as you are. And this was good enough for them to 
find her. (Sorry for speaking on your behalf, Angie, but I was already 
answering his mail, so I couldn't skip this bit. :p)

>>However, I can clearly see that it's a
>>motivating factor for you, which probably means that it's a motivating
>>factor for some other people out there. Whether dumping a whole bunch of
>>time and energy into creating some sort of credit system will pay off in
>>a slew of new documentation contributions, I don't think anyone can say.
>>I certainly don't think it's a no-brainer, though.
>
>I think the changes I proposed will not require "dumping a whole bunch
>of time and energy." Just to create a simple block to list the
>contributors to a document page? [...]

It will require PHP/SQL to be written by coders and reviewed by Security 
Team and then implemented by d.o webmasters on d.o. My guess would be 
that this will take more than "an hour or two".

>>I'd be more +1 towards something like Greg suggests, where we make the
>>list of handbook maintainers more clear, or even going as silly as
>>adding little badges next to the names of anyone who contributes to the
>>handbook. Make the recognition around the act of contributing to the
>>'greater good' of the handbook itself, rather than personal glory around
>>individual pages.
>>
>>However, until/unless someone steps up to spec out and code something,
>>this is all just theoretical discussion. I'm going to get back to coding
>>now. ;)
>
>All real progress starts with discussion. Please don't be so dismissive.

See my first comments, please? :)

-- 
Sincerely,
Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20080526/4d295dd6/attachment-0001.pgp